Education Ministry's Teacher Policy: Balancing Between Degrees and Competence.

Opinion on the National Teachers' Bill.

By McPius Ssekatawa S

In a spirit of enhancing professionalism in the education sector, the government, in 2021, announced its plans of closing teachers training colleges. This entailed a shift from the Grade III and Grade V teaching qualifications in favour of a bachelor’s degree. By that very fact, teachers were required to train for four years, up from the former three-year training period. This commenced with the 2021/2022 academic year.

In a serious turn of events, a number of teachers training colleges, both Primary Teachers’ Colleges (PTCs) and National Teachers’ Colleges (NTCs) were closed and others restructured for secondary schools and vocational training institutions in 2023.

Lately, the minister of state for education tabled a bill geared to improving professionalism in the teaching sector. Key to this bill is the ministry having the sole mandate of placing internships for teachers, limiting the teaching practice to degree holders, and punitive measures for breach of terms of the bill and unprofessional conduct.

The issues in the bill, especially the mandatory requirement of the degree, have sparked off widespread controversies among educators, policy experts, and different stakeholders in the education sector. As the debate on this matter intensifies, it is key to analyze the pros and cons of this policy.

We need to deal with the fundamental question: What truly makes a good teacher? Is it solely a matter of credentials, or the ability to connect with the students, enable them to comprehend, and inspire learning? No one doubts the purpose of higher qualifications in teaching. However, is it solely the criterion for determining suitability? It is never the case that qualifications are equivalent to competence. The biggest mistake the ministry is making is sidelining a large pool of competent educators with diplomas and certificates. Are all nurses, mechanics, and experienced artisans degree holders?

In addition, is it realistic for a teacher of a kindergarten to have a degree like their secondary school counterparts? Honestly, we know what transpires in nursery schools. Elementary schools are nearly secondary homes for toddlers. Does it necessitate one to have a degree only to sing “Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star”? Rather, is it the case that without a degree, a nursery teacher can never teach the alphabet without turning it into a doctoral thesis?

Second, the case of the government solely remaining with the mandate of placing teachers for internships is contentious. Currently, medics have been on strike over internship delays. On top of the existing burden, can it afford to make placements for both the already striking medical interns and teachers concurrently?

In addition, if a degree in education is the sole aim for practicing the profession, what necessitates competence tests then? Demanding a bachelor’s degree in replacement of the grades III and V qualifications obtained from the teachers training colleges would suffice in isolation. This, in another way, undermines the relevance of the degree qualification as being superior to the former qualifications.

Here comes another concern. During the four-year period when teachers without degrees are phased out and others are still training, won’t there be a shortage for teachers? If so, which plans will address that gap? It is still tricky how the ministry will bridge the gap in the process of implementing this new policy.

In all this, the possibility is that the government messed up the education sector from the start. In comparison with other professions, it gets clearer how jumbled the sector is. The principal mistake from the start was abolishing teachers’ training colleges, an indirect way of undermining their work. Teachers from such institutions would have been subjected to aptitude tests in the field to test their competence. However, this passed and cannot be revisited.

To address these concerns, the government can reconsider, if possible, the mandatory degree requirement. Aptitude assessments can fill the gap in this demand. Teachers with their former qualifications can be tested for their viability in the profession by way of the aptitude tests.

Furthermore, differentiating qualification requirements is vital. We need to implement a tiered structure where different stages of education roles require different credentials. There is a need to recognize and appreciate subject-specific expertise. For instance, diplomas and certificates can be the minimum requirement for nursery and primary schools, while degree holders could teach at the secondary level.

Another way of encouraging further education is the provision of scholarships or low-interest loans to teachers interested in pursuing degrees on the job. This way, experienced teachers can stay in the classroom as they further their studies concurrently.

Additionally, the government can consider regular refresher courses and training programs for teachers. This would ensure that they stay updated with the latest teaching trends and educational methods.

Considering these factors, as the government puts strong emphasis on the degree qualifications, it ought to rethink the teachers’ remuneration. It will sound unjust when the input of meeting its demands is high, yet peanuts are earned at the end.

Ultimately, the bill has good intentions. However, the means are slightly misguided. It could be the case that we are killing a mosquito with a gunshot. Education as a service should be about the empowerment of teachers to offer the best for students. This empowerment goes beyond formal qualifications. We need to include skills, love, and competence on top of the rigid enforcement of degrees. We look forward to professional development through integration of these alternatives.

The writer is the author of the WEEKLY DISSECTION, a blog where he analyzes contemporary and relevant Ugandan issues.